ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] A New Plan for No Spam / Velocity Indicator

2003-04-26 07:18:57
Vernon Schryver <vjs(_at_)calcite(_dot_)rhyolite(_dot_)com> wrote:
The NNTP "ihave/sendme" server-server mechanism is not a "pull model"
similar to "pull" for email.

  Mostly because there is no server-server "pull" for SMTP.  SMTP is
"push", and the problem is that spam is pushed down peoples throats.

 If the NNTP client-server or reading mechanism is involves a "pull
model", then so does email because of IMAP and probably POP.

  Which aren't SMTP.

  The spam problem is solely one with the SMTP protocool.  No one
claims that IMAP or POP have a major (or even minor) role in
originating spam.  If they were, we have a simple solution: stop
asking for messages from that imap/pop server.  All of the spam from
that server will instantly be gone, and will *never* come back.

 Besides, the "pulling" of NNTP had nothing to do with controlling
netnews spam.

  It gives the "pulling" server more control over the traffic it
accepts.  Too much spam in alt.sex?  Stop asking for it.  That can be
done with NNTP, IMAP, and POP, as they permit the "pull" host to not
ask for traffic, and that traffic stops.  It can't be done with SMTP.

  As I said in the first week this list started, a large part of the
spam problem is the design of the SMTP protocol.  It is *designed* to
permit anonymous originators, lying about message authors, redirection
of traffic to anyone, and traffic amplification.  No other network
protocol has all of these "features".  As a result, no other protocol
has the continuing problem that SMTP has.

  False analogies of SMTP to NNTP, IMAP, or POP aren't helpful.

  Alan DeKok.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg